Admiralty Law
Admiralty courts were a prominent feature in the prelude to the American Revolution. For example, the phrase in the Declaration of Independence “For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury” refers to the practice of Parliament giving the Admiralty Courts jurisdiction to enforce The Stamp Act in the American Colonies.[2] Because the Stamp Act was unpopular, a colonial jury was unlikely to convict a colonist of its violation. However, because admiralty courts did not (as is true today) grant trial by jury, a colonist accused of violating the Stamp Act could be more easily convicted by the Crown.
Admiralty law became part of the law of the United States as it was gradually introduced through admiralty cases arising after the adoption of the U.S. Constitution in 1789. Many American lawyers who were prominent in the American Revolution were admiralty and maritime lawyers in their private lives. Those included are Alexander Hamilton in New York and John Adams in Massachusetts.
In 1787 Thomas Jefferson, who was then ambassador to France, wrote to James Madison proposing that the U.S. Constitution, then under consideration by the States, be amended to include "trial by jury in all matters of fact triable by the laws of the land [as opposed the law of admiralty] and not by the laws of Nations [i.e. not by the law of admiralty]." The result was the Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Alexander Hamilton and John Adams were both admiralty lawyers and Adams represented John Hancock in an admiralty case in colonial Boston involving seizure of one of Hancock's ships for violations of Customs regulations. In the more modern era, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes was an admiralty lawyer before ascending to the federal bench.
Article III, Section 2 of the United States Constitution grants original jurisdiction to U.S. federal courts over admiralty and maritime matters. While admiralty cases remain the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts, many lawsuits involving incidents in maritime practice may be brought in either federal or state court under the "saving to suitors" clause.[3]
In federal courts in the United States, there is generally no right to trial by jury in admiralty cases, although the Jones Act grants a jury trial in some cases.
Applicable law
A state court hearing an admiralty or maritime case is required to apply the admiralty and maritime law, even if it conflicts with the law of the state, under a doctrine known as the "reverse-Erie doctrine." While the "Erie doctrine" requires that federal courts hearing state actions must apply state law, the "reverse-Erie doctrine" requires state courts hearing admiralty cases to apply federal admiralty law. This change can be significant.
WHAT IS A BOND SLAVE?
In Jewish law, it is defined as a former slave which has been set free from servitude but voluntarily "chosen" out of love for his master/mistress to remain their slave. This nation has duked it's so-called citizens to "willfully" submit to being slaves for the sake of protection and so-called common good. The bond slave no longer has the protection of "inalienable" rights as established in "common law;" however, the bond slave has now become an imaginary ship which must be steered by the helmsman by way of a "summons," "statues," "rules & regulations," "license," etc as he or she is placed on the court "docket" to stand before the "bank" or judge.
